Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71651
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: yohgaki@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <52E6A1CA.60808@gmail.com>
References: <CAGa2bXZJoyV+9qN6v8j3+vHexoqDtHR4cZkgdtdc1GpVkDaD9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGa2bXY4=3UVDVdR=curS96r=pvTrxDYA0wgy+k7X46omtTPgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <7E.A3.39789.25841E25@pb1.pair.com> <CAGAGxbb5xTCQaS7=1BPN0pWPz_Z3MqegJkaJFZfg8Eou+zELYA@mail.gmail.com>
 <12.A5.39789.B7851E25@pb1.pair.com> <52E16E01.7070401@gmail.com>
 <52E1BDB0.6050406@garfieldtech.com> <CAGa2bXYUg_YfOhbOVJpt+Hr6R5H34wb1h6dzov-sAzxz-fJtEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <52E40F7E.3050001@gmail.com> <CAGa2bXaEnYfBkWXTMARg4h4+s5QDHMNPHLB9UT9CgNdwDu_-og@mail.gmail.com>
 <52E5563A.4070701@gmail.com> <CAGa2bXY2ZB+sHtC50AeJYhH82aKJ2s__3B5jf9T7kJ_ZkkUrTw@mail.gmail.com>
 <52E6A1CA.60808@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:33:18 +0900
Message-ID: <CAGa2bXbELbubmfscOxcbKmNOOghevrNkUjdiPm0dqAYcQdPPkw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136dfc6ea042804f0fcfa17
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PHP6] Function name consistency
From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki)

--001a1136dfc6ea042804f0fcfa17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi Rowan,

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>  IMHO, aliases would not affect readability. Users would understand what
>>
>> word_wrap() and wordwrap()
>> htmlspecialchar and html_special_chars()
>> and so on
>>
>> means.
>>
>
> But they might wonder if there was a difference between them, particularly
> if the aliases are more distinct (e.g. count() vs sizeof()).
>
>
I agree. Completely different name could be pain.


>
>  I agree that automatic aliasing would not be good.
>> String and array function names needs more discussion.
>> GD function names may be aliased automatically, for example.
>>
>> We should discuses if we are going to add standard name aliases
>> to module functions or not, perhaps?
>>
>
> Yes, I think per-module / extension is the way to go - as with the pg_*
> functions you mentioned earlier.
>
> It can then be proposed that a certain module be converted to OO (as
> happened with DateTime), another tidied up to have a consistent naming
> structure, and another left alone until more "interesting" changes are
> being made to it.


String and array function alias discussion would be difficult to reach a
consensus.
Let's separate discussion and concentrate module function at first.

We have new function "apache_request/response_headers" and "getallheaders"
in "CLI" server.

const zend_function_entry server_additional_functions[] = {
    PHP_FE(cli_set_process_title,        arginfo_cli_set_process_title)
    PHP_FE(cli_get_process_title,        arginfo_cli_get_process_title)
    PHP_FE(apache_request_headers, arginfo_no_args)
    PHP_FE(apache_response_headers, arginfo_no_args)
    PHP_FALIAS(getallheaders, apache_request_headers, arginfo_no_args)
    {NULL, NULL, NULL}
};

We should avoid these kind of naming also.

I'll check modules and list candidates in the RFC.

Regards,

--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohgaki@ohgaki.net

--001a1136dfc6ea042804f0fcfa17--